Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Revelation in the Gospels? | NT general Archive 1 | Jim Dunne | 9675 | ||
Thanks for the reply - no criticism taken. And thanks for providing the link to the web site where you got the quote - it looks interesting and informative. Let me be clear on what I was suggesting (or not suggesting, perhaps.) I am NOT suggesting at all that Genesis 1:1 is not true - I believe that with all my heart. But does it necessarily follow that the blow-by-blow description of the creation story is a completely factual recounting of what happened? I don't believe so. All I'm saying is that we don't know. Creation exists in all its' glory - bite it, taste it, it's real. If you believe (and I do) that God is the responsible Fact behind creation, do you also have to believe that on the third day of creation, God created plants? I really don't think so. There are a couple of quotes by Dr. Gregory Boyd from Letters from a Skeptic that are appropriate, I think: "I see no reason why God would have to limit Himself to the genre of literal istory in revealing Himself to us. There is no reason why certain sections of Scripture could not contain some symbolic elements. If using teh literary genres of myth or allegory would better express the point God is trying to make, then what would prevent Him from using them? Nothing." "The idea that the Bible must be 100 percent literal if it is 100 percent inspired is a very recent, and quite misguided notion." These sum up what I was trying to express very well. In Him, Jim D. |
||||||
2 | Revelation in the Gospels? | NT general Archive 1 | glory777 | 9701 | ||
Jim- First, about the facts of the gospels. There were other sources at the time that Jesus could have related His experiences to, such as his mother. And you are right, He did have time after His ressurection to relate other information. But scripture says the Word is God-breathed and inspired by the HOly Spirit (2 Tim. 3:16) and the gospels are scripture. How can you explain the fall of Lucifer? No one was there to witness it. It was given by inspiration. If these words and/or visions were given to the prophets, were they more believable than Matthew, Mark, and the others? As to creation being in the number of days that were written in scripture, I find this a lot more easier to believe than what science is trying to get us to believe. But if you question, looking to find scripture as allegorical, what parts are you going to say are just stories and not fact? Instead of trying to fit the Word to what science says happened, go the opposite way and see if science can fit God's Word. Archaelogists are finding more and more facts proving the OT stories true that they said couldn't happen. How long until they realize the "big bang" was actually a "spoken Word"? I find the temptation of Eve fascinating in this regard. She had the Word of God right with her, but she listened to the other who said He couldn't mean what He said. God bless Debbie |
||||||